They do not hold an absolute majority, and the money was earmarked and ringfenced for specific areas.
Poll: Exit Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Results discussion and OcUK Exit Poll - Closing 8th July
- Thread starter JohnnyG
- Start date
- Status
They do not hold an absolute majority, and the money was earmarked and ringfenced for specific areas.
Imagine if the SNP took a £1Bn bribe to get Theresa May OUT of number 10, there would be outrage in the RW press.
I want to laugh, but know it's absolutely true. Staunch Tories wheel out lines like look at the alternative and then go on to explain the end of the world and we're supposed to believe they are our saviours with strong and stable... mean while Jeremy is thinking about how to hide a warehouse of letters, Theresa is playing with her Money tree with it's roots in our privacy and Osbourne/Hammond claiming to help the poor whilst the cuts keep coming and borrowing/spending into unethical/immoral areas increasing.
It's amazing how we don't have the money, yet referendums and elections are being slung out as the solution. So are we rich or poor or both?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 1,726
Lets have a look what we could have had... according to the conservatives costings
Lets have a look what we could have had... according to the conservatives costings
I cant see the abolition of student fees up there? The current cost of Royal Mail is £4.4bn and none of the other nationalisation ideas are on that list either.
The cost is also somewhat disingenuous as .5bn is money already going to Northern Ireland so not part of the DUP deal.
I think the other items adds up to the £1.5 billion, not trying to say you could have funded the whole Labour manifesto with it. Its more of a "Let's spend the £350m a week on the NHS" kind of comparison.
But yes, its only and extra one billion over two years, not £1.5 billion.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 8,982
Does a police officer only cost £30k per year and if so the DUP deal is over two years so assuming a police officer isn't just for Christmas should that not be £0.6Bn? A full time staff trained fitter in heavy industry with pensions NICs and all the rest, facilities, equipment, training etc. is expected to cost £40k-£60k per annum cost to company. Wow police officers are cheap, I'll have 2 please.
It is a bit "fake news" really. I am in now way a fan of the Conservatives, but if you want to have a go at them then there is plenty of ammunition without making up dodgy figures.
Headline cost. Training, equipment etc costs about the same again but its always easier to use £30k when you are "trying" to prove a point
Much better to say 5,000 police or if you use the full proper figure of £0.5b per year extra going to the DUP then you could have had 8,333 fully expensed and trained Police officers per year which is damning enough compared to the money wasted to buy the DUP's support on just 4 votes in Parliament. Remember this deal isnt for two years of support but only a commitment that the DUP will vote for the Tories in the Queens Speech, the two budgets and the Brexit deal vote at the end of the A50 period. All other votes, the DUP are on a free for all.
Indeed. My first thought when I saw that comparison chart is that it's going to get picked apart. I get the point it's trying to make, but it fails because it's too easy to debunk the figures.
Better to just make the point that spending £1bn of taxpayers money on political bribes to prop up the government is so morally bankrupt it doesn't need charts or memes.
I'm not suggesting that Northern Ireland doesn't need this investment by the way. But the WHOLE country needs investment of this level (per capita) to get our public services working properly again.
Meanwhile, funny how they've managed to find room in the finances to give the Queen a £6m pay rise too:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40412343
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 8,982
Crown Estates profits are up £24m apparently.
Except of course they haven't. The Royal Family gets a % of the profits of the Crown Estates, if the Crown Estates makes more money then the monarch will get more from it. The treasury gets even more cash because of it.
It's still Treasury money the Queen is taking which she doesn't need to. Her expenses are up £2m. Fine, take an extra £2m to cover that. But beyond that, why the need for a pay rise way above what her 'subjects' are getting? The Royal Family are not exactly "just about managing". And let's not even go there with the cost to the taxpayer of renovating Buckingham Palace.
Headline cost. Training, equipment etc costs about the same again but its always easier to use £30k when you are "trying" to prove a point
Much better to say 5,000 police or if you use the full proper figure of £0.5b per year extra going to the DUP then you could have had 8,333 fully expensed and trained Police officers per year which is damning enough compared to the money wasted to buy the DUP's support on just 4 votes in Parliament. Remember this deal isnt for two years of support but only a commitment that the DUP will vote for the Tories in the Queens Speech, the two budgets and the Brexit deal vote at the end of the A50 period. All other votes, the DUP are on a free for all.
Aren't those costs based on the conservatives own estimates of Labour policy?
https://www.indy100.com/article/the...onservative-dup-deal-magic-money-tree-7808526
It is only Treasury money because that is where the profits of the Crown Estate goes. But the Treasury has more money because the profits of the Crown Estate have increased.
it isn't really - she gets a fixed portion (15%) of the crown estate income, the rest goes to the treasury - the crown estate itself doesn't belong to the treasury though it isn't the private property of the Queen either
Are there any other Conservative Party figures you are this sceptical of?
I think it was mentioned on Question Time recently
Heres a link http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/11/labou...ast-time-there-was-a-hung-parliament-6701733/
Though that version of events of why it didn't go through is different to the version said on QT.
It was after the last hung election in 2010
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,671
Different Labour party to today, and not the same thing at all...
Brown wrote to the DUP prior to the election saying he would not institute spending cuts of the kind proposed by the Tories. At the time, it was seen as a "bribe" for DUP support if needed, which it possibly was, but no discussions with the DUP ever took place about any kind of support arrangement.
Very different scenario to actively engaging with the DUP as the Tories have now done.
- Status